"Made in the USA" - where should we stand?

[Million2000]

We certainly live in a "global economy" but we still live in individual nations, cities, and towns made up of people like ourselves. Blue collar jobs were the first to be hit by globalization but they won't be the last, white collar is next-H1Bs anyone? If you don't support your local economy with your patronage, don't expect others to care when your position gets cut in the next round of outsourcing.

My own philosophy changed a few years ago to prefer American made goods, primarily from reputable companies with good sourcing of raw materials. It's hard to find many products American made or even from other developed nations, but then I think shopping should be hard so you don't buy so much. At the very least a consumer should be cognizant of where the products are being made, it baffles me the way people buy Chinese made goods by the bucket load even though the country's labor, environmental, and legal norms are in conflict with our own. I also of course blame the US companies who have greedily followed the offshoring train, but they are only responding to incentives, those incentives are mainly consumer driven. If we didn't buy it, they wouldn't make it there.

My own process goes like this:
1. I need (key word there) a certain type of product.
2. I search for products and prices, focusing initially on all US made goods. If within a reasonable budget of 2 to 3 times the cost of cheap China crap (CCC as I tell my wife), meets the need I have of the product, and comes from a reputable company with a good track record (BBB and google assist here) I'll purchase it.
3. If step 2 doesn't yield the product I need, I expand the search to companies/products made outside in the US in developed nations that hold similar values as does our country (Canada, UK, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, etc.).
4. If step 3 doesn't yield the product I need, I attempt the search in countries that aren't hostile to the US (though don't have the same labor/environmental protections), namely the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, etc.

So I try to avoid China at all costs because of quality concerns (I don't trust anything produced in the country) and political concerns (the Chinese government is actively hostile to our national interests).

[maizefolk]

We certainly live in a "global economy" but we still live in individual nations, cities, and towns made up of people like ourselves. Blue collar jobs were the first to be hit by globalization but they won't be the last, white collar is next-H1Bs anyone? If you don't support your local economy with your patronage, don't expect others to care when your position gets cut in the next round of outsourcing.

That's interesting. I guess my default assumption is that no one besides me would care if my position was outsourced (or what's more likely be made redundant as a result of improved automation) whether or not I support my local (national?) economy.

I can see how -- if you didn't start out with that feeling -- buying locally or nationally produced goods would feel like a much more important aim.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

I always try to keep in mind that the US was a hotbed of environmental degradation and deficient labor practices in the 19th and early 20th century. We made it past that era through economic development and increased productivity. China and many other countries are going through that right now, only with a keener eye and greater influence from the global community.

Oh, and I don't care if your job gets outsourced. There are other jobs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[acroy]

keep in mind manufacturing is only 1 part of the total value chain of any item and is often a small one. Focus on where the item is made is a narrow focus indeed.

The item has to go through conceptualization - design - component sourcing - manufacturing - shipping/warehousing - marketing - sales - etc etc etc

The manufacturing portion itself is often the smallest margin. You buy a $200 TV at best Buy. It cost $32 to make and the Chinese company made a profit of $2. Design cost $2.5M and happened in Japan. Engineering the factory cost $20M and happened in S Korea. Best Buy made $30 profit and returned it to shareholders. it was shipped by MERK who made .88c/unit, and there are 2,000 units/contained, and the container ship has a cpacity of 15,000 containers. The container ship was made in Denmark and cost $190million. It burnt 2,500 TONS of fuel on the trip from China to USA, which was purchased from Exxon Neftegas, the Russian subsidiary.... etc etc etc....

Where is the value? is the point of assembly all that important? I would say NO.

[Cadman]

I prefer to buy made in USA, except for cars. American made cars seem to be poor quality.

+1

Fun fact: American made vehicles are produced EXACTLY to the standards prescribed to the workers by management. If the cars are not built to your standards, it is because they are poorly designed and engineered. Vehicles are poorly designed and engineered because management accepts poor quaility in order boost profits.

The easiest way to explain this is also the most depressing. German car manufacturers are run by career men who worked their way up the engineering dep't ladder. American car manufacturers are run by career men who worked their way up the finance/sales ladder.  Two different approaches, two different results.

**Triggered** I'm sorry, I work in an affiliated industry and I can assure you what you've written isn't even remotely true. I'm not saying this to be a dick, but when the word "fact" gets put in front of a sentence it helps if its correct. If you'd like me to elaborate, I can, but it's not exactly germane to the topic here, so I'll keep my mouth shut.

[Just Joe]

Please elaborate about the differences between domestic and import vehicles. I like to learn.

[bwall]

Cadman: hmmmm.... which of the two statements that I made do you take issue with? The one that implied that factory workers aren't responsible for design and technology, they just do what they're told just like in any other company?

Or the one about the two difference in career paths of upper management between Germany and the USA?

[Cadman]

Hi bwall,

Well, you said that "American made vehicles are produced EXACTLY to the standards prescribed to the workers by management". In reality, management doesn't prescribe standards at all, and neither do factory workers (regardless of what country "owns" the design). Standards are usually clearly defined requirements established at the start of a program before any engineering work is done. They can be safety requirements, legal requirements, engine emission requirements, or internal company 'base requirements' to name a few. These are usually the minimum things the vehicle has to meet by any manufacturer, US or other. The VW dieselgate scandal would be an example of not meeting a standard.

If you mean 'standard' as some level of customer acceptance or expectation, that also isn't delegated by management. For that, we have to pay a visit to the marketing division, the supplier quality reps, the engineering divisions, tier suppliers, the program MEs, the assembly MEs, the line workers, the dealers and branch managers, the training department and everyone in between. If you mean 'standard' as some form of reliability, that's something else entirely.

You then said "Vehicles are poorly designed and engineered because management accepts poor quality in order boost profits." This line of thinking works well with cheap consumer goods. If you buy a $15 coffee pot from Walmart, you have an expectation it won't burn down your house, or won't give you an electric shock, but if it fails after 2 years due to 'poor quality' you might not give it a second thought. You might even find a way to justify buying another one at the same price and dispose of it the same way when it dies. But I know of no global automaker that endorses this line of thinking. "Poor quality" never boosts profits; it leads to expensive recalls, logistical expenses, customer dissatisfaction, 'negative optics' and many other wastes, and manufacturers know that. Poor quality in the auto industry is almost always unintentional, but to elaborate on that, we have to define quality.

Your comment about upper management between Germany and the USA is interesting, because I technically work under the German arm of a US based company, yet both maintain design and manufacturing centers. Nothing impresses me more than the German assembly line workers. They are fast, help each other when one falls behind, have great attention to assembly detail and are well educated. Nobody wants to be the reason the assembly line stops. 

However, industry wide there seem to be just as many 'finance men' at the top as there are 'engineering career men', regardless of the country of origin, and unless the person is incompetent for the job*, I can't conclusively agree that either delivers a perceived difference in results.

*If you want a shining example of incompetence and how to destroy a car company, check out Albert Lee's "Call Me Roger".

[GuitarStv]

Hi bwall,

Well, you said that "American made vehicles are produced EXACTLY to the standards prescribed to the workers by management". In reality, management doesn't prescribe standards at all, and neither do factory workers (regardless of what country "owns" the design). Standards are usually clearly defined requirements established at the start of a program before any engineering work is done. They can be safety requirements, legal requirements, engine emission requirements, or internal company 'base requirements' to name a few. These are usually the minimum things the vehicle has to meet by any manufacturer, US or other. The VW dieselgate scandal would be an example of not meeting a standard.

If you mean 'standard' as some level of customer acceptance or expectation, that also isn't delegated by management. For that, we have to pay a visit to the marketing division, the supplier quality reps, the engineering divisions, tier suppliers, the program MEs, the assembly MEs, the line workers, the dealers and branch managers, the training department and everyone in between. If you mean 'standard' as some form of reliability, that's something else entirely.

You then said "Vehicles are poorly designed and engineered because management accepts poor quality in order boost profits." This line of thinking works well with cheap consumer goods. If you buy a $15 coffee pot from Walmart, you have an expectation it won't burn down your house, or won't give you an electric shock, but if it fails after 2 years due to 'poor quality' you might not give it a second thought. You might even find a way to justify buying another one at the same price and dispose of it the same way when it dies. But I know of no global automaker that endorses this line of thinking. "Poor quality" never boosts profits; it leads to expensive recalls, logistical expenses, customer dissatisfaction, 'negative optics' and many other wastes, and manufacturers know that. Poor quality in the auto industry is almost always unintentional, but to elaborate on that, we have to define quality.

Your comment about upper management between Germany and the USA is interesting, because I technically work under the German arm of a US based company, yet both maintain design and manufacturing centers. Nothing impresses me more than the German assembly line workers. They are fast, help each other when one falls behind, have great attention to assembly detail and are well educated. Nobody wants to be the reason the assembly line stops. 

However, industry wide there seem to be just as many 'finance men' at the top as there are 'engineering career men', regardless of the country of origin, and unless the person is incompetent for the job*, I can't conclusively agree that either delivers a perceived difference in results.

*If you want a shining example of incompetence and how to destroy a car company, check out Albert Lee's "Call Me Roger".

So, if it's not related to standards, it's not related to the people doing the manufacturing, it's not related to the expectations of the supervisors, and it's not related to the design . . . what is the reason that US made automobiles consistently rate worse in comparison to say, Japanese cars?

[Cadman]

GuitarStv, I think it goes back to the root of what the question really is. It's almost preferable for a person to say an American car is "crappy" than to say it's low quality, or unreliable. Because at least that leads to the question of what 'crappy' means. One person's "crappy" (plastic cladding peeling off their 200k mile Grand Am they bought used) is very different from someone else's "crappy" (new Range Rover that spends more time in the shop than at home).

There are high quality cars that are unreliable (like an old Jag) or low quality cars that are very reliable (like a K-car). There are very well designed and engineered cars that excel and both (like a Mercedes 240D), and fail at both (Yugo). Given these 4 categories, the 240D looks like a pretty sweet ride, until you consider emissions, acceleration or creature comforts.

Does a mechanically reliable, well-designed and built vehicle that has a 1-star safety rating and requires frequent service intervals fall into the "crappy" category? At least these points can be evaluated and measured.

IMO, there are really "no bad cars" on the market today (short of those sold in 3rd world countries). Each has strengths and weaknesses and caters to different buyer's priorities.

[GuitarStv]

The line of questioning came about because a survey of more than 400,000 car owners found that there were many more reliability issues with American made vehicles over a long period of time.  I like your optimism in saying that there are no bad cars anymore . . . but a car that breaks down or fails you is one that is objectively worse than a car that works as expected.  According to the best data available, American brands make some of the most unreliable cars that can be purchased.

You've said that this unreliability is not due to manufacturing, standards, supervisors/management, or design.  I think it's fair to ask why these cars are so unreliable then . . . doubly so if you're expecting people to buy something simply because it has a "Made in the US" sticker.

[Travis]

GuitarStv, I think it goes back to the root of what the question really is. It's almost preferable for a person to say an American car is "crappy" than to say it's low quality, or unreliable. Because at least that leads to the question of what 'crappy' means. One person's "crappy" (plastic cladding peeling off their 200k mile Grand Am they bought used) is very different from someone else's "crappy" (new Range Rover that spends more time in the shop than at home).

Given the chart shown earlier, "crappy" roughly equates to "needs repairs more often that a competitor."  There has to be a tangible reason people think Ford means Found On Roadside Dead and every forum like ours has nothing but praise for Honda and Toyota.

[bwall]

Cadman: Thanks for the insightful post.

Perhaps I should have said 'specifications' instead of 'standards'. I don't want the conversation to fall into a discussion of definitions (and I don't think this is your intention, btw).

I was just trying to point out that when people say "American built cars are uninspiring pieces of junk, unlike German cars." or "Japanese cars may be uninspiring, but they're the most reliable cars in the world" and usually tack on something along the lines of 'spoiled union workers,' etc. that this is faulty logic. The workers are just doing what they're told. The workers at McLaren don't wake up and say "I think I'll build the most advanced cars the world has ever seen today and I won't do anything less." any more than the workers in Detroit don't say "I feel like building an uninspiring car today, that's what I'll do". They both do what they are told, that's all. And if you're unhappy with a US built car, it's not b/c of the workers, but the people above them who tell them what to do (be it design, engineering, materials, management, etc).

The point about career path of upper management is very important, IMHO. German CEO's are on the record as saying "I want to have the best driving experience possible. How can we make this affordable?" versus the American CEO's who say "How can we build the most affordable car that we can sell to the most people?". Two different ways to tackle the same problem. It's not one person who makes a difference in a large manufacturer, just the corporate culture that is the cumulative result of many decades of decisions, both large and small.

[Cadman]

Sorry if I was vague, reliability absolutely IS tied to manufacturing, design and engineering, hence my comment about needing to pay almost every department a visit. All it takes is one customer focus group to convince a marketing team that a new feature is a 'must-have' and you can watch the ripple effect all the way down to the final line inspector. A change to a legacy design is always a risk. And additional parts add complexity which statistically affects reliability.

I'm not necessarily defending US automakers in this thread (there are stinkers and there are exceptions), just trying to point out that 'quality' and 'reliability' are different things and that nobody is setting out to lower the bar intentionally. The US engineers are using the same design tools as the EU makers, and they're sourcing the same parts from the same global suppliers, who anymore are doing the majority of component engineering internally.

Consumer Reports is great for learning about what problems new models are experiencing, but I personally take the buy/avoid summary with a grain of salt. Blenders and toasters? Sure. But when radio reception and Bluetooth pairing significantly reduce a reliability rating (Subaru Impreza down 20% for example) it's important to get the whole picture. Toyota has earned a bit of a reputation for broken door handles (even in this community), but I don't think any of us would say "don't buy a Toyota, they're unreliable". Yet I suspect it would have a very real effect on a CR score.

Look at JD Power, look at Edmunds. Consider 'initial quality' reports as these are good indicators of factory build quality and production control. Or do what I do. Buy an old used car you like.

[libertarian4321]

US labor laws are not the best (poor healthcare options, maternity/paternity leave, etc)
Buying goods from other nations ultimately raises their standard of living
"free-market principles" dictates that marketplace competition ultimately leads to the best products

I'm not sure I understand your point here.  Frankly, those two statements, about supporting the "free market" and supporting nations with government enforced labor laws seem to be at odds with each other.

The vast majority of the time you are choosing between products of the USA and China (or an even less advanced third world country).  I suspect the percentage of times you have to choose between a product made in the USA, versus some allegedly "enlightened" country like Sweden or France, is pretty negligible. 

So your penchant for choosing nations with enlightened maternity laws versus the horrific conditions we are forced to endure here in the USA probably doesn't come into play very often?

And when you buy something made in some Chinese/third world factory, you are almost certainly supporting truly horrific working conditions (and I'm not talking about quibbling over "maternity leave" policy in this case).

Anyway, I'll buy Made in the USA if the products are competitive in quality and price.  I'll even pay a bit of a premium for Made in the USA, but if I'm not going to buy a made in the USA product if it's vastly higher in price vs. quality.

[sokoloff]

The VW dieselgate scandal would be an example of not meeting a standard.

I think that can be argued to be a case of excessively (and maliciously) precisely following a poorly written standard.

[libertarian4321]

I prefer to buy made in USA, except for cars. American made cars seem to be poor quality.

I think that's more a carryover from the 1980s and 90s, when the US automakers were complacent and thought they would never be seriously challenged, than a reality today.

For some vehicle types, the US vehicles are not only as good, but superior.

Take the pickup truck market for example.  When it comes to pickups, the foreign brands are "also rans" at best.  It isn't even competitive.  The US models are better, and vastly outsell their foreign competitors.

Lest ye think "well, that's just a small market segment," the Ford Series outsells the Toyota Camry and Honda Accord by a nearly 3:1 margin.  The top 3 best selling models in the USA are trucks.

BTW, my "poor quality" Chevy Silverado just had it's Sweet 16 birthday last month.  I treat it like crap, and it looks like it.  I haven't washed it since maybe 2010.  But other than one "recall" back in 2003 or so, I haven't put anything into it but things you'd normally expect to replace.  Drove it from South Texas to upstate NY earlier this year.  Ran like a champ.  I keep hoping it will fall apart, so I can justify buying a new vehicle. 

But it just ... won't... die. 

My wife's babies her 2010 3-series BMW like it's a child.  This is a super highly rated vehicle.  It's been at the "top of it's class" for about 20-years running. Despite that, the damned thing is a repair/maintenance nightmare.  Plus, over the years, it's been in the shop for several recalls. 

And no, we won't be buying another BMW.  We just need to keep this German POS running until my wife gets her Tesla Model 3.

[Just Joe]

Its hard to look at vehicles and guess what is good and what isn't. I don't put any stock in the "initial quality" surveys b/c the vehicle is under warranty. I want to know which vehicles are the best at 10 years or 15 years.

Some brands or some vehicles within a brand an be worse than others b/c the financial managers say they have to meet a price point.

I've worked on cars that had plastic parts where others used aluminum or steel. Two bolts vs three. Rivets or crimps vs bolts. Snap together vs threaded fasteners.

Done right even the cheaper assembly design can be the better more workable design if it is cheap enough and serviceable enough.

If I pay $6K for a new car (Fiat or Yugo way back when) then I expect to replace more parts than I would on a big expensive sedan with a quality brand.